Re: [EVGRAY] FLYING IN SPACE WITH A REAL FLY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE STATION!!!

Body

Ole,

Yes because the Russians did not have Walt Disney and Stanley Kubrick to
makes sure everything appeared to work.

Please show me the math how 20 watts of energy had enough to overcome
the free space path loss. The radio telescope was 26 meters at 5ghz I
think it was, this provides a 60 db gain advantage as far as my math
goes.  Can you show me in RF engineering math how this would work with
the FSPL of over 250 thousand miles?

I guess this guy did not need a radio dish to hear the moon transmissions:
http://www.arrl.org/eavesdropping-on-apollo-11

The cameras on the moon were allegedly 10 FPS slow scan.

https://www.popsci.com/how-nasa-broadcast-neil-armstrong-live-from-moon#page-2

https://www.wired.com/2007/01/nasa/

watch him walking backwards, one can see the extra frames beyond 30 FPS
this is supposed to be slow scan ten frame I say no way!  At 1/6 gravity
men in the best training condition of their lives should have weighed 60
lbs with the suits on which should allow for 4 foot jumps easy.  The
fact no one seems to jump higher than a foot and a half is a dead give away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMINSD7MmT4


On 6/3/2018 6:09 PM, [email protected] [EVGRAY] wrote:
>  
>
> Hi Mick;
>
> The 10kW was from the Earth transmitter. The 20W was from the
> transmitter on the Moon. On Earth two radio telescopes were used to
> pick up the weak signal.
>
> According to the Wikipedia article
> (https://wiki2.org/en/Apollo_TV_camera) 30fps color cameras were used
> on every mission starting with Apollo 10. The first manned mission to
> land on the Moon was the Apollo 11. Thus this must have been shot with
> a 30fps color camera.
>
> "Somehow six missions to the moon and back and every mission suceeded
> and everyone lived, just the unlikelyhood of that is staggering even
> if one rocket had more stages and the fuel necesary."
> There was also a mission where the crew almost died without even
> landing on the Moon. It went even worse for the Soviet space program.
> All of their Moon rockets failed. Number two of their moon rockets
> crashed at the launch site and made one of the largest artificial
> non-nuclear explosions in human history
> https://wiki2.org/en/N1_(rocket). <https://wiki2.org/en/N1_%28rocket%29>
>
> Regards
> Ole
>
>
>
> ---In [email protected], <mkjekyll@...> wrote :
>
> Ole,
>
> I know they alledge to use the moon as a reflector in EME but is it
> proven they are getting moon bounce or something else, is there an
> approx 6 second delay?  If so how is the moon bounce overcoming the
> free space path loss?
>
> Calculating with an 18 db gain antenna and 60 db reciver path loss is
> at about 160db for 250k miles so would require some serious wattage
> for a gain of 160 more than 10kw.  Even at 10kw how long could the
> batteries sustain that along with air conditioning at 250 degrees all
> day and heating for the freezing nights.
>
> But back to the analog video, this I know like the back of my hand.  I
> can tell you from personal experience when slowing down to 10 frames
> per second with a time base corrected analog setup that can record and
> playback with variable speed sync it looks like stop action very jerky.
>
> Looking at the video it is shot at a higher frame rate than normal to
> make it look slowed down, opposite of slow scan.  The astronots are
> galloping sideways to make their gate look different.  
>
> Somehow six missions to the moon and back and every mission suceeded
> and everyone lived, just the unlikelyhood of that is staggering even
> if one rocket had more stages and the fuel necesary.  
>
>
>
>
>